Of course the Government isn’t going to launch a new bank Not enough Nattie photos

Close Ayers Rock? You’ve got to be joking

July 9th, 2009 at 04:28pm

This is a joke, right? Please tell me it’s a joke.

Federal authorities want to ban people from climbing one of Australia’s great natural wonders – Uluru.

An estimated 100,000 people make the steep ascent each year.

The Director of National Parks wants to close the climb for “visitor safety, cultural and environmental” reasons.

A 10-year draft management plan for the park, issued on Wednesday, says authorities will work towards closing the track.
Uluru, which is located in Australia’s “Red Centre” and used to be known as Ayers Rock, attracts about 300,000 tourists a year. Most are from overseas.

Visitors are free to ascend the path up Uluru most of the time. But signs urge people not to do so out of respect for indigenous culture.

We shouldn’t climb it because some people who were born near it say so, and because a few people have died over the years? That’s like saying “I was born in Canberra and people have died on the roads, so you shouldn’t drive on Canberra’s roads”…give me a break.

Environment Minister Peter Garrett has to sign off on the plan. A spokesman would not be drawn on whether Mr Garrett supported closing the track.

The spokesman said “there will obviously be a range of views” about the Uluru climb, and urged people to take part in the public comment period on the plan, which closes on September 4.

To their credit, the opposition are opposed to closing the great rock.

I may have to enquire about how one gets involved in this public consultation, and report back. A quick google search didn’t turn up anything useful, nor did a quick check over Peter Garrett’s website (I’m not brave enough to browse it for long).


Entry Filed under: General News,Samuel's Editorials

Print This Post Print This Post


  • 1. legshagger  |  July 11th, 2009 at 12:12 am

    Okay Samuel, I’m going to publish your address (not the one in the White Pages) and invite people to trek about on your roof and nauseum and see how you like it! I find it ironic that you post this rubbish considering your aversion to any mention of Big Rocks!

    I await the Stalinist Censorship!

  • 2. Samuel  |  July 11th, 2009 at 12:31 am

    Slight difference. My house is private property. Ayers Rock is not.

  • 3. legshagger  |  July 11th, 2009 at 10:48 am

    Some people would argue that Ayers Rock IS their private property … I wouldn’t like a bunch of loonies traipsing over my sacred site.

  • 4. Samuel  |  July 11th, 2009 at 10:51 am

    By legal definition, they are wrong, thankfully.

  • 5. Steady Eddie  |  July 11th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

    Isn’t it strange how we never heard anything about Ayers Rock (or anything else) being a “sacred site” 40 or 50 years ago? I can remember a letter in the Herald Sun saying how the Rock had gone to rack and ruin since it was given to the Aborigines. This person said how they went for a tour in 1976 – the white tour guide was very helpful and informative, they could go wherever they wanted and take as many photos as they liked and the area was kept clean and welcoming to tourists. He went back in 2003 (when the letter was published) and said it was terrible. Every time someone tried to take a photo the Aboriginal guide told them they couldn’t because it was “sacred”, and when they did he demanded the cameras be surrendered and all the photos deleted. There was rubbish everywhere, the accommodation was shoddy and pricy and the attitude was one of hostility and negativity, as if the Aboriginal owners didn’t want tourists there at all.


July 2009

Most Recent Posts

Search Blog or Web


Ads By Google

Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg and modified for Samuel's Blog by Samuel Gordon-Stewart.
Printing CSS with the help of Martin Pot's guide to Web Page Printability With CSS.
Icons by Kevin Potts.
Powered by WordPress.
Log in